Batman Begins Now it's my turn: Doc's problems with Begins...

[Mr. Socko]

Lol!

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

So......lemme get this right.....if we're to assume a trilogy.....you want Nolan to include Robin before the end of it....which, pressumably, is the third film....while we all seem to agree that Robin should be done after this triliogy?

Wtf?

 

[DocLathropBrown]

So......lemme get this right.....if we're to assume a trilogy.....you want Nolan to include Robin before the end of it....which, pressumably, is the third film....while we all seem to agree that Robin should be done after this triliogy?

Wtf?

If this is directed at me, I have no idea what you don't get about how I feel. You seem to find it odd that I can have an opinion on when to introduce Robin of my own and have it be different than yours. C'mon, man. You're better than to act like that. Surely I'm reading your post wrong. You can't possibly be saying that my opinion is stupid and yours is right.... I thought you better than to get that immature.

 

[mcilroga]

Burton did better, my ass!

On the other hand, he made what is the second greatest Batman film, in my opinion.

...And, I like messing with people. Because I'm a dick.

 

[Cyrusbales]

Burton did better, my ass!

On the other hand, he made what is the second greatest Batman film, in my opinion.

...And, I like messing with people. Because I'm a dick.

The big Black words explain the blue comment nicely!

 

[DocLathropBrown]

Burton did better, my ass!

On the other hand, he made what is the second greatest Batman film, in my opinion.

...And, I like messing with people. Because I'm a dick.

If you think bashing Burton would "mess" with me, you thought wrong. Especially since you just provided evidence that you're not the dick you're trying to be.

 

[El Payaso]

Basically di**s are always trying to mess with people...

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

If this is directed at me, I have no idea what you don't get about how I feel. You seem to find it odd that I can have an opinion on when to introduce Robin of my own and have it be different than yours. C'mon, man. You're better than to act like that. Surely I'm reading your post wrong. You can't possibly be saying that my opinion is stupid and yours is right.... I thought you better than to get that immature.

It sounds contradictory, is what it sounds.

You agree that Robin should be done in the next triolgy....but your still getting on Nolan for not wanting to have Robin in this trilogy.

That's where the WTF?! came in for. That and I really like to curse. Alot.

Basically di**s are always trying to mess with people...

Or **** them.

 

[DocLathropBrown]

It sounds contradictory, is what it sounds.

You agree that Robin should be done in the next triolgy....but your still getting on Nolan for not wanting to have Robin in this trilogy.

That's where the WTF?! came in for. That and I really like to curse. Alot.

Um, I never suddenly changed stance on when I want Robin introduced. I only said I wouldn't be against your idea.

 

[mcilroga]

Yikes, and I thought I was joking. Noobs are easy targets, I'll say. What power you vets lord over me!

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

Indeed.

So....you think Robin should be in the third film? I mean, how much emphasis do you think should be put on him in that film?

 

[DocLathropBrown]

Indeed.

So....you think Robin should be in the third film? I mean, how much emphasis do you think should be put on him in that film?

Not too much. I like how Batman Forever handled it on a superficial level. I don't like Dick saving Batman from the rubble, among other things. That seems more like a Jason Todd-level of disobedience. That, and Batman was more than resourceful enough to get out of that.

What I liked and think should be replicated is Dick's story being a secondary focus of the film. Ideally, he'd be at least sixteen. Any younger kind of stretches the imagination beyond the realm of what's reasonable. That and we want he and Bruce to work together until well by the college stage. Start him off too young, and Bruce is ancient by the time he quits.

I could stand him becoming Robin by the third act, but that's too rushed. Just start him off training by the end, and he appears as Robin in the fourth film.

 

[DocLathropBrown]

Double-post...

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

I hear you. I do think, though, that devoting a trilogy to Robin may be more effective....and may create certain "era" types. This is the Young Batman trilogy....the next can be the father-Batman trilogy....

Although, I've always found Batman using a teen-sidekick as dubious. I'd like to see how people react when they realize that Robin is a kid...not some college kid with sideburns...when he starts out.

 

[DocLathropBrown]

I hear you. I do think, though, that devoting a trilogy to Robin may be more effective....and may create certain "era" types. This is the Young Batman trilogy....the next can be the father-Batman trilogy....

Although, I've always found Batman using a teen-sidekick as dubious. I'd like to see how people react when they realize that Robin is a kid...not some college kid with sideburns...when he starts out.

I think the preteens will love him. Preteens generally do.

I think devoting a trilogy to Robin is a nice idea, but I don't think he lends himself to that much focus. At least, not one Robin. The Robin mantle? You could totally do a trilogy about Dick, Jason and Tim. And actually, I think you could explore Jason Todd's beginning and downfall in three films, actually, now that I think about that. Sort of like Anakin Skywalker or something.

I don't like to think in terms of set trilogies, myself. With Comic Book films, I don't think anything big should be tied up into a trilogy type of thing. I prefur the films capsulized into themselves and just continuous, like the material itself.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

Hmm..I hear you.

Connecting to the preteens can be hard. Usually, Hollywood thinks they "get" them...but they're behind by the time they think they've caught up.

Robin would have to be probably something of a blend of all we've seen of him. He'd need GREAT jokes......and the casting would be more critical than ever. Obviously. Otherwise, we could get a kid who's a generation too late, if you know what I mean.

My problem with extending the family, is you lose sight of Batman himself....and his troubles and conflicts, b/c it ends up feeling crowded. Losing Dick would be bad, especially if he's popular. Jason had always been considered a runty jerk off by Bat-fans....which is why Bat-fans decided to kill him. So.....that'd be something to think about to. How would portray Jason? As the ******* everyone seems to remember him as? Or as a good kid?

The reason Jason interests me so much, is b/c of his death. I'd LOVE to see kids crying over that **** in the theaters....and parents demanding WB's heart in a glass jar over it. It'd be something extraordinary....especially if they kill him the way they did in the comics.

 

[redfirebird2008]

Having read this thread, I've gotta say that there are good points for both sides. One thing I don't like, however, is the attempt at claiming that Burton's Batman films are deeper than Nolan's. That's false. I've watched B89 probably over 500 times and it's a popcorn flick first and foremost. You want deep films? Then don't watch a superhero film. Memento and The Prestige, both by Nolan, are deeper than anything Burton's ever made.

As for B89 and BB, like I said before it's all subjective and there are good things in both films. I like certain things about B89 better than BB and vice versa. It all really depends on what key areas are most important to people. For me, seeing Batman/Bruce be the main character in the film is most important so I tend to favor BB by a hair. But I love both and agree with both sides that there are major flaws in both films. One thing I think, however, is that Nolan will have a better crop of films if only because of continuity. B89 and BR really don't have much continuity unfortunately. BR is a fun film but it's almost entirely disconnected from B89. And then, with Burton and Keaton leaving, the third film is COMPLETELY different and inferior of course to the first two. Nolan will likely only improve from 1st to 2nd and 2nd to 3rd, especially with Goyer out of the way. BB has plenty of screenwriting cliches, but I think the Nolan Bros. will do a much better job than Goyer did. Hopefully Nolan does improve with each film and then I think we'll have the best superhero trilogy ever (not that that's saying too much given how crappy the ending for X-Men was; Spidey is too cheesy, etc. lol).

 

[redfirebird2008]

Having read this thread, I've gotta say that there are good points for both sides. One thing I don't like, however, is the attempt at claiming that Burton's Batman films are deeper than Nolan's. That's false. I've watched B89 probably over 500 times and it's a popcorn flick first and foremost. You want deep films? Then don't watch a superhero film. Memento and The Prestige, both by Nolan, are deeper than anything Burton's ever made. Burton is known as the king of style over substance and he succeeds in a big way with many of his films including both B89 and BR. The grandeur (think the final scene of B89) he creates on the screen despite minimal character development for Batman is pretty incredible/awesome in my opinion.

As far as comparing B89 and BB, like I said before it's all subjective and there are GREAT things in both films. I like certain things about B89 better than BB and vice versa. It all really depends on what key areas are most important to people. For me, seeing Batman/Bruce be the main character in the film is most important so I tend to favor BB by a hair. But I love both and agree with both sides that there are major flaws in both films. One thing I think, however, is that Nolan will have a better crop of films if only because of continuity. B89 and BR really don't have much continuity unfortunately. BR is a fun film but it's almost entirely disconnected from B89. And then, with Burton and Keaton leaving, the third film is COMPLETELY different and inferior of course to the first two. Nolan will likely only improve from 1st to 2nd and 2nd to 3rd, especially with Goyer out of the way. BB has plenty of screenwriting cliches, but I think the Nolan Bros. will do a much better job than Goyer did. Hopefully Nolan does improve with each film and then I think we'll have the best superhero trilogy ever (not that that's saying too much given how crappy the ending for X-Men was; Spidey is too cheesy, etc. lol).

 

[Cyrusbales]

Having read this thread, I've gotta say that there are good points for both sides. One thing I don't like, however, is the attempt at claiming that Burton's Batman films are deeper than Nolan's. That's false. I've watched B89 probably over 500 times and it's a popcorn flick first and foremost. You want deep films? Then don't watch a superhero film. Memento and The Prestige, both by Nolan, are deeper than anything Burton's ever made. Burton is known as the king of style over substance and he succeeds in a big way with many of his films including both B89 and BR. The grandeur (think the final scene of B89) he creates on the screen despite minimal character development for Batman is pretty incredible/awesome in my opinion.

As far as comparing B89 and BB, like I said before it's all subjective and there are GREAT things in both films. I like certain things about B89 better than BB and vice versa. It all really depends on what key areas are most important to people. For me, seeing Batman/Bruce be the main character in the film is most important so I tend to favor BB by a hair. But I love both and agree with both sides that there are major flaws in both films. One thing I think, however, is that Nolan will have a better crop of films if only because of continuity. B89 and BR really don't have much continuity unfortunately. BR is a fun film but it's almost entirely disconnected from B89. And then, with Burton and Keaton leaving, the third film is COMPLETELY different and inferior of course to the first two. Nolan will likely only improve from 1st to 2nd and 2nd to 3rd, especially with Goyer out of the way. BB has plenty of screenwriting cliches, but I think the Nolan Bros. will do a much better job than Goyer did. Hopefully Nolan does improve with each film and then I think we'll have the best superhero trilogy ever (not that that's saying too much given how crappy the ending for X-Men was; Spidey is too cheesy, etc. lol).

if you watched this 500 times(B89), then you would have to be a most passive of audience members to not notice the subtlties of symbollism and social critique and it's expansive depth. Are you aware with any sociological issues or even expressionism at all? Universities have used B89 as a focus film for advanced film studies repeatedly, so I think you may have been watching a different film....

the Prestige is a popcorn flick, pretty effects and a plot that isn't half as intelligent as it thinks it is. Choosing what could be cool in favour of key filmic aspects like acting and directing quality, quite insulting as an audience member to watch.

Memento is a blunt instrument of a film, bombarding the audience with it's supposed subtle messages, which realy gives no depth whatsoever, as we are given no credibility, we are just given very obvious messages, not promoting an active or intelligent audience.

 

[redfirebird2008]

You can read anything you want into any film I suppose. But wait a second with your claims against the Prestige. The Prestige had some of the strongest acting of any film in 2006 so you can quit throwing that nonsense out there. Batman '89 is not a deep film. It's a popcorn flick and has been criticized by PROFESSIONAL critics for not having a deep enough plot or characters. The same can be said of BB. They are popcorn flicks meant to make money for Warner Brothers. Do I enjoy the heck out of them? Definitely. I love them both. Are they masterpieces with great depth? Heck no.

The Prestige isn't a masterpiece either, but it's deeper than either Batman film. You want social commentary? In a time when people are greedier and more competitive than ever, the "rivalry" in the Prestige should at least hit home with many people. The world continues to move faster and faster with stronger and stronger competition for every last dollar to be made, so everyone has become so wrapped up in their own economic benefit that they are willing to do anything to win against their competition. Just look at Enron and other big accounting scandals, or the steroids issue in sports. Another big social commentary in my opinion involves marital fidelity. Just look at the divorce rate in the U.S. It's pretty high. Some divorces just happen over time, but many others are because one spouse can't be faithful to the other. I'm sure quite a few happen because of one spouse's obsession with work/money (which is exactly what causes rifts for both main relationships in the Prestige). The social commentary in the Prestige is pretty grim, but then again so is the state of affairs in the U.S. in my opinion.

Yet another huge issue involves technology and at what point do we consider it a harm to humanity? The atom bomb is a great example from our past, but cloning (used in this film) is another technology that will become a major issue as the technology begins to develop even more. Television, the Internet, etc. are considered good things. But are they really? In general, many people are less informed now than ever before despite having easier access to information than any generation before them. Technology can be a great or terrible thing. The technology curve has spiked since the Industrial Revolution began. It will continue skyrocketing to the point that we will rely on technology too much. It's already getting there with cell phone usage for instance. Humans (despite our lack of efficiency and reliability compared to a lot of technology out there), theoretically, have a conscience whereas technology does not. If we rely too much on technology, it will ruin society as we know/knew it. Jackman's character in the Prestige becomes obsessed with technology to the point that he does some absolutely wretched things. Angier loses his conscience and his humanity all because of Tesla's incredible technology and his own desire to use that technology for a professional rivalry.

 

[Cyrusbales]

You can read anything you want into any film I suppose. But wait a second with your claims against the Prestige. The Prestige had some of the strongest acting of any film in 2006 so you can quit throwing that nonsense out there. Batman '89 is not a deep film. It's a popcorn flick and has been criticized by PROFESSIONAL critics for not having a deep enough plot or characters. The same can be said of BB. They are popcorn flicks meant to make money for Warner Brothers. Do I enjoy the heck out of them? Definitely. I love them both. Are they masterpieces with great depth? Heck no.

The Prestige isn't a masterpiece either, but it's deeper than either Batman film. You want social commentary? In a time when people are greedier and more competitive than ever, the "rivalry" in the Prestige should at least hit home with many people. The world continues to move faster and faster with stronger and stronger competition for every last dollar to be made, so everyone has become so wrapped up in their own economic benefit that they are willing to do anything to win against their competition. Just look at Enron and other big accounting scandals, or the steroids issue in sports. Another big social commentary in my opinion involves marital fidelity. Just look at the divorce rate in the U.S. It's pretty high. Some divorces just happen over time, but many others are because one spouse can't be faithful to the other. I'm sure quite a few happen because of one spouse's obsession with work/money (which is exactly what causes rifts for both main relationships in the Prestige). The social commentary in the Prestige is pretty grim, but then again so is the state of affairs in the U.S. in my opinion.

That isn't depth, that is thrown in your face obviously, no subtlety or decency of the craft of filmmaking at all. Not sure what critics you've been reading, but B89 is regarded in quite high esteem by most of them. The prestige was terrible acting BTW.

As for depth in B89, what about the effects of the media within society, how the the power over the media grants the Joker extra status and he who holds the media, can enforce his will, for instance the parade. The idea of consumerism killing people thtough chemicals in make up etc is a remark about the social consumerist lifestyle, as is the media saturation. And the money being dropped is quite an obvious one, but the idea of someone who is notably 'bad' can be redeemed through money and suchlike. Also the notion of beauty and art being similar, and how people and thus their identities to some extent, are self proclaimed and can be assigned by oneself, much like the notion suggested in Almodovar's work. There is a whole load more but I shall not bother telling you all of it, as I don't feel like writing out a 50 page document on the intricacies of the film. From a producers POV, yeah, it was a popcorn flick, however the director, Burton, decided to include a lot more there, for the more active and intelligent audience members to adress.

Chris Nolan isn't very talented, thank god his brother is a good writer though.

 

[redfirebird2008]

Chris Nolan isn't very talented, thank god his brother is a good writer though.

I beg to differ. I'm sure a lot of other people would too. It's all subjective, but he's one of the best young directors out there. And he wrote the screenplay for Memento. He co-wrote the Prestige with his brother and he will likely heavily edit TDK script (which it sounds like he already did and Jonathan sent a second edit back to Chris for more editing recently).

 

[Cyrusbales]

I beg to differ. I'm sure a lot of other people would too. It's all subjective, but he's one of the best young directors out there. And he wrote the screenplay for Memento. He co-wrote the Prestige with his brother and he will likely heavily edit TDK script (which it sounds like he already did and Jonathan sent a second edit back to Chris for more editing recently).

I'm very familiar with how the nolan brothers work, john mainly writes it all, and chris messed it up with the direction. I can reel off why he is a bad director if you like? Mainly he is excedingly bland.

 

[redfirebird2008]

I'm very familiar with how the nolan brothers work, john mainly writes it all, and chris messed it up with the direction. I can reel off why he is a bad director if you like? Mainly he is excedingly bland.

Nolan a bad director. Now that is funny. You're not gonna convince me man. He's one of the best young directors out there and if he keeps up his pace, he will be one of the best of all time IMHO regardless of how much you insist on bashing him.

 

[Cyrusbales]

Bashing? Because he uses gimicks rather than what is needed? Cutting up the time frame for no actual reason, ie: The prestige.

35 isn't exactly young either. His cinematic style relies upon nothing, he uses a few gimicks but nothing even noteworthy, any director could come up with what he produces.